Group work on thematic working groups 1

Discussions on:

• Institutional innovation
• Technological innovation

2 hosts for Institutional Innovation, Alan and Beth
3 hosts for Technological innovation, Teklu, Katherine and Birru

Highlights from each group:

---

Institutional innovation:

Alan:

Institutional innovation looking for new ways of involving communities in land and water mgt. in Ethiopia. Mandate for selecting case studies:

• To look for successful examples where traditional community and institutions are strong
• For whole system – establishing look at the wider system implications - holistic approach
• This case studies should cover
  • Pastoral areas
  • Some communal grazing schemes
  • Private farm schemes
  • Where local by-laws have successful
  • Sustainable example:
  • Financial, social and technical
  • Range of agro-ecologies
  • Best practices from Ministry – link into other projects
  • Local champions

Beth:

Institutional innovation – two things additional ideas for the case studies

• Integration – collaboration areas where there are strong instituions e.g. Adama and Borena, oromo Geda system.
• Areas where there is no existing intervention – Konso area
• Participatory forest management. Look for funding opportunities We need to look for incomes locally rather than rely on outside resources

---

Technological innovation:

Birru:

• What would you like to see addressed by this group:
• Land and water mgt. technologies are so broad. We have to be very specific otherwise we’ll end up with thousands of technologies. We limit to agricultural water mgt. What are these technologies. Most of the technologies are not embedded with knowledge. We have to be sure that they are knowledgeable or not.
• There must be an exhaustive list of institutions since the work is very vast. The institions need to do the inventories. Otherwise it is very hard to identify the environmental requirement etc.
• Monitoring and evaluation system after technologies are being released after endorsing the technologies and they can be further refined.
• What will be the faith of this platform after NBDC. Handover to some institution etc.

Katherine:

What is the problem:

• Missing social context
• Blanket approaches
• Inconsistency – lack of continuity
• Not based on indigenous knowledge
• Lack of capacity – fluctuation of knowledge
• Pilot level technologies – not research based
• Research is not demand driven (not participatory)
• We don’t really know what an agro-ecology is at what level do we work
• No documentation of best-practices (No M &E)
• Doubt about objectives: development vc conservation
• Poor commitment
• Who is responsible/coordinator

Learning event:

• Best practices – what works where ? Invite experienced people /grass root model farmers
• Include empowerment – engage people
• ToT
• Status of technologies: using develop + transferring
• ICT for farmers – market information crate a network
• Suitability condition – agro-ecologies
• Getting to media for awareness

Innovation approach

• How to do what
• At different level
• Needs to be practical – small enterprises
• Invite DA/directors/NGO’s?, unions
• How to make it a priority mandate?

Teklu:

• Question: which networks and organization should we link up with:
• Networks – some organizations MoA and water resources higher learning institutions, associations civil society organizations working on NRM. Some are listed below:
  • Ethiopian society of soil science
  • Ethiopian rain water H. Association
  • MoWE/MoA mechanization centres
  • EIAR
  • HLI’s
  • Ethiopian civil society N.W OnCC (FFE) host
  • ATA
  • HoAEN/Center

• Individuals key who have been involved in technology generation but not necessary linked to organizations, kind of head hunting would work. Few individuals are listed below:
  • Dr. Solomon Abate (NBI)
  • Ato Abiti (MoWE)
  • Ato Getachew H. (EIAR)
  • Ato Gizachew Abegaz
    
    
• Support for the network: international, regional, private sector and potential donors. UNDP, UNEP, SLM, GIZ, EU, DFID, ATA and Private sector